Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 11 Aug '10 17:06
    Florida's attorney general and a group of state lawmakers moved Wednesday to push the Sunshine State into the forefront of the national illegal immigration debate with a bill modeled after Arizona's controversial law -- only, they claim, with a better shot of withstanding a court challenge.

    State Attorney General Bill McCollum, following the lead of Virginia's top prosecutor, also issued an opinion saying state law enforcement already have the right to ask about immigration status in the course of their duties.

    The Florida proposal would, like Arizona's, require law enforcement officers to check the residency status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant in the course of a "lawful stop."

    It would require state businesses to use a national registry to ensure new employees are legal and would increase penalties for illegal immigrants who commit other crimes. The bill would also require non-citizen immigrants to carry immigration documentation or face a misdemeanor charge that could carry up to 20 days in jail.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/11/florida-ag-mccollum-unveils-immigration-modeled-arizonas/
  2. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    11 Aug '10 17:12
    It's fairly plain that this is not going to stop until the federal government does something to address the issue. The AZ law may be struck down, but it started an avalanche. Sooner or later, the feds have to get the message that saying "What you're doing is wrong" is not enough. They're going to have to get immigration reform done, come Hell or high water.

    By the same token, that will require compromises from both sides. The GOP can't say "We don't want illegals here but we're not willing to grant any sort of path to legalization for anyone here illegally. It's simply not going to work.
  3. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    11 Aug '10 17:12
    Interesting. I suppose this illegal immigration thing must be pretty serious, with individual states passing legislation like this on top of the strenuous and increasing efforts of the federal government to deal with it...
  4. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    11 Aug '10 17:14
    Originally posted by DrKF
    Interesting. I suppose this illegal immigration thing must be pretty serious, with individual states passing legislation like this on top of the strenuous and increasing efforts of the federal government to deal with it...
    The efforts of the federal government are plainly insufficient. There's plenty of blame to go around in terms of why, but the fact remains. That the Bush administration may or may not have been even weaker on the matter is immaterial.
  5. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    11 Aug '10 17:23
    Originally posted by sh76
    The efforts of the federal government are plainly insufficient. There's plenty of blame to go around in terms of why, but the fact remains. That the Bush administration may or may not have been even weaker on the matter is immaterial.
    Indeed. After all, last year the federal government filed more charges for immigration violations than all other crimes and misdemeanors combined (!). Similarly, each year for the past five years has seen record numbers of deportations of unauthorised immigrants. Which at least puts the lie to the notion that the federal government simply isn't enforcing the law.

    As you say, urgent reform of immigration policy seems to be the only realistic way to proceed. As you also say, though, certain parties (often not above spreading the falsehood that the federal government is inactive on this issue) may well stand in the way of any such reform, instead - bizarrely - supporting moves towards something more like a police state. For the darker skinned people, anyway. For now.
  6. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    11 Aug '10 17:40
    Originally posted by DrKF
    Indeed. After all, last year the federal government filed more charges for immigration violations than all other crimes and misdemeanors combined (!). Similarly, each year for the past five years has seen record numbers of deportations of unauthorised immigrants. Which at least puts the lie to the notion that the federal government simply isn't enforcing the la ...[text shortened]... ves towards something more like a police state. For the darker skinned people, anyway. For now.
    They need to enforce the law in a way that will remove the incentives for illegal activity. They need to start enforcing it, in a blanket way, on people who hire, house, and provide banking services for illegal immigrants.

    Each of these processes has a choke point at which legal residence ought to be ascertainable. Darkness of skin need not be a factor.

    Our politicians are unable to bring themselves to do the things that would actually work because it means pissing off the special interest groups that give them money to get re-elected.
  7. 11 Aug '10 17:51
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    They need to enforce the law in a way that will remove the incentives for illegal activity. They need to start enforcing it, in a blanket way, on people who hire, house, and provide banking services for illegal immigrants.

    Each of these processes has a choke point at which legal residence ought to be ascertainable. Darkness of skin need not be a facto ...[text shortened]... because it means pissing off the special interest groups that give them money to get re-elected.
    dont forget land mines and assault helicopters on the southern boarder.
  8. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    11 Aug '10 17:57
    Originally posted by sh76
    It's fairly plain that this is not going to stop until the federal government does something to address the issue. The AZ law may be struck down, but it started an avalanche. Sooner or later, the feds have to get the message that saying "What you're doing is wrong" is not enough. They're going to have to get immigration reform done, come Hell or high water.

    ...[text shortened]... sort of path to legalization for anyone here illegally. It's simply not going to work.
    That is true. One thing that has come of Arizona's move is to force attention to the matter. I just hope the "Indians" know how to work this situation politically so they don't get screwed.
  9. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    11 Aug '10 18:00
    WARNING "BAD" WORDS ETC.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO_3d12CSnk
  10. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    11 Aug '10 18:00
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    They need to enforce the law in a way that will remove the incentives for illegal activity. They need to start enforcing it, in a blanket way, on people who hire, house, and provide banking services for illegal immigrants.

    Each of these processes has a choke point at which legal residence ought to be ascertainable. Darkness of skin need not be a facto ...[text shortened]... because it means pissing off the special interest groups that give them money to get re-elected.
    Absolutely. If, as noted, year on year more and more illegal immigrants are being caught and deported with little to no effect on illegal immigration, perhaps it is time to put at least as much effort in to prosecuting those American citizens who employ, house and provide services to those illegals. The incentives to enter the US illegally are high - and I would hazard will remain so, even if the risk of arrest and deportation grow. Evidently, the incentives to employ, house and provide services to illegals are also high - but in this instance, I would hazard that these would be more easily reduced, since the US citizens breaking the law in this way could face a greater number and severity of punishments for their crimes than deportation...

    You are quite correct: it is considerably easier, politically speaking, to demonise the illegals themselves and ask why nothing is being done to them than it is to criminalise and punish voters who get cheap and easy labour.
  11. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    11 Aug '10 18:01
    Originally posted by sh76
    It's fairly plain that this is not going to stop until the federal government does something to address the issue. The AZ law may be struck down, but it started an avalanche. Sooner or later, the feds have to get the message that saying "What you're doing is wrong" is not enough. They're going to have to get immigration reform done, come Hell or high water.

    ...[text shortened]... sort of path to legalization for anyone here illegally. It's simply not going to work.
    Pure politics. Do you think it's a coincidence that these laws are all being passed NOW a few months in front of mid-term elections?
  12. 11 Aug '10 18:13
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Pure politics. Do you think it's a coincidence that these laws are all being passed NOW a few months in front of mid-term elections?
    you've hit the nail on the head.
  13. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    12 Aug '10 13:53
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Pure politics. Do you think it's a coincidence that these laws are all being passed NOW a few months in front of mid-term elections?
    Of course it's politics. Passing a law to start a national debate is politics. So, what's wrong with that?

    I don't think AZ passed the law to regain control of the House for the GOP. I think they passed it to send a message to the federal government that it's got to get off its bum and do something. As I said when the law was first passed, they probably knew there was a fairly good chance that the law would be struck down. But its passage was a success in its main goal- to thrust the issue back into the national debate.
  14. Standard member MacSwain
    Who is John Galt?
    12 Aug '10 16:13 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sh76
    It's fairly plain that this is not going to stop until the federal government does something to address the issue. The AZ law may be struck down, but it started an avalanche. Sooner or later, the feds have to get the message that saying "What you're doing is wrong" is not enough. They're going to have to get immigration reform done, come Hell or high water.

    sort of path to legalization for anyone here illegally. It's simply not going to work.
    Obviously there appears to be variances in law classes in some countries.
    1- There are legislated laws.
    2- All laws carry weight equally.
    3- Following law is lawful.
    4- Disobeying law is lawlessness.

    On that basis, I will rewrite your post substituting a word on occasion (which will be in brackets) to demonstrate the point I'm making.

    After reading, you should re-think your position: That law should be compromised. Where to start? Where to stop? If agents of the law are given free rein to compromise one law: Why will they not compromise any of them whenever convenient?
    _______________________________________________

    Originally posted by sh76 (with changed words bracketed)
    It's fairly plain that this is not going to stop until the federal government does something to address (bank robbery). The AZ law may be struck down, but it started an avalanche. Sooner or later, the feds have to get the message that saying "What you're doing is wrong" is not enough. They're going to have to get (bank robbery) reform done, come Hell or high water.

    By the same token, that will require compromises from both sides. The GOP can't say "We don't want (bank robbery) here, but we're not willing to grant any sort of path to (amnesty) for (bank robbers) already here. It's simply not going to work.
  15. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    12 Aug '10 16:18 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by MacSwain
    Obviously there appears to be variances in law classes in some countries.
    1- There are legislated laws.
    2- All laws carry weight equally.
    3- Following law is [b]lawful
    .
    4- Disobeying law is lawlessness.

    On that basis, I will rewrite your post substituting a word on occasion (which will be in brackets) to demonstrate the point I'm making ath to amnesty for (bank robbers) already here. It's simply not going to work.[/b]
    Your point works if you equate all lawless conduct. I don't.

    I don't equate murder with jaywalking and I don't equate illegal entry with bank robbery.

    Again, we go back to the same thing we discussed the other day: IMO, it's not a bright line but a continuum.



    MacSwain's line:

    black.... line.... white
    Lawless activity........... bright line........ lawful activity



    sh76's line:

    black...... dark gray..... gray..... light gray...... white
    murder.... bank robbery..... theft..... illegal entry..... lawful activity